Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by JP 2018-530853.
853 teaches a superconductor conductor (para. 0001) comprising a stranded wire having a plurality of metal element wires twisted together (stranded wire; para. 0036) one or more tape shaped superconductor wires each having a superconductor layer formed on a surface of a flexible substrate and being spirally wound around the stranded wire along its longitudinal direction (para. 0074, 0092), a flexible smoothing layer disposed between the stranded wire and the superconductor wires so as to cover the periphery of the stranded wire along its longitudinal direction (para. 0036-0037).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2018-530853 in view of Takayasu (US 2014/0243207).
853 teaches a product as described above in claim 12, but fails to teach a winding wound with the superconductor conductor.
Takayasu, however, teaches a superconducting coil magnet wherein superconductor cables are wound (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of orindary skill in the art to provide the superconductor conductor cables of 853 wound in a winding in order to produce a superconducting magnet as taught by Takayasu.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11, 13-14, 16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest the dimensions of the metal element wires and the stranded wire as recited in claim 1 in combination with the limitations of claim 1.
Specifically, the closest prior art of record US 2004/0200637 teaches stranded wire having a diameter of 16.5 mm (Table II).
The prior art of record fails to teach the superconductor wires having a bending angle of 12 or less along the outer circumference of the stranded wire in combination with the limitations of claim 13.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL A WARTALOWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am - 5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights